About your Search

20130101
20130131
Search Results 0 to 9 of about 10
that when we leave, the taliban and al qaeda will come back. as long as they're given safe haven in pakistan, they're just waiting for us to leave. i do not see any benefit for our country to remain there. host: some of the callers have said we need to keep at least 10,000. some of the stories we have been reading have said anywhere from 3000-6000. you say we should be out of their completely? caller: yes, i think we should just leave. as long as they have one of the most corrupt governments of their -- as long as pakistan allows the taliban and al qaeda safe havens, they are just waiting for us to leave and they will come back in. host: we are going to move on to paul in illinois. paul served as an officer. what kind of work did you do over there? caller: i was army and i work in civil affairs during reconstruction in the 2010 and 2011. host: what kind of response did you get for the reconstructive work you were doing? caller: it was mixed with the afghan people. in areas interested in the work for reconstruction with medical and education. education is the key to success. one said we have
libya and egypt and syria and pakistan. we are talking about a world that is changing and is less responsive to u.s. pressure and u.s. military power and diplomacy. that changes something that chuck hagel is aware of and he has well-formed views on. at the heart of that view is that power should be diffused away from the american military and plates and other power centers around the world and that idea itself is controversial. president obama agrees with that and many in congress do not. host: the former senator gave an interview with his former state paper, "the lincoln journal star" he said his critics have distorted his views. guest: it is unusual for a to give any interviews at all but he has faced a much criticism that he wanted to get one opening salvo out there and that is what he did. he basically said that he will have a chance to correct the record during his confirmation hearing. we should note from that interview that he is not backing down from any of his positions. he is not saying he no longer believes in the things that he believed in that were so controversial. h
at the instability in pakistan. this is a real danger we have to think about in the future. if we ignore them, that is a prescription for getting more americans killed. host: i want to get your reaction to what the secretary of state had to say yes today. here's what she had to say. [video clip] guest: i think you would hear the same from the intelligence community or dod. the work that was done in afghanistan and pakistan, they have taken out a whole cadre of leadership. people have migrated back to other parts of the world who are affiliates, part of the jihad syndicate. they are extremists and have designs on overthrowing existing governments, control and territory. there has been the decimation of al qaeda in the afghanistan- pakistan region, we have to contend with the wannabes and the affiliate's going forward. host: any reaction? guest: there has been a loss of capacity on the part of al qaeda central and pakistan. because osama bin laden is dead, that doesn't mean allocate it is dead -- it does mean al qaeda is dead. they are very much alive. they have migrated. they are now seeing a
of afghanistan and pakistan -- previously opposed the surge in afghanistan. these are issues the need to be addressed. where do we think afghanistan is going to go? why did he think at one point that afghanistan was such a strategic interest? senator hagel has made a lot of statements over the years about the middle east and central asia that i think have to be addressed. israel-u.s. relationships have to be put into context. i think the caller started them. but the fact is not simply that it is between the u.s. and israel, there are statements the senator made on the sanctions on iran. top of the dictatorship in syria. not signing on to a resolution, asking europe to designate hezbollah as a terrorist organization. on and on. the context suggests that his views about the middle east and his use about the palestinian it-is really conflict have to be brought together with those other statements to get a bigger picture of how he thinks about the middle east. i think it is rare that a nominee -- i do think that people often say the president should give deference to his and -- to his app
afghanistan, pakistan? guest: the group in northern mali, it is making the news these days, is very closely tied. al qaeda and islamic maghrib were the first real franchise of al qaeda outside the middle east and south asia. this group had been formed in the 1990's to fight to overthrow the government of algeria. it metastasized over time. of syrians in north africa were the largest group present foreign fighters into iraq during the first stage of the u.s. presence over there. that led to five years ago when it formally allied itself with al qaeda, the first franchise. there's no direct command and control from al qaeda central, but they draw from the same equality and inspiration and one could argue and that they have been the most effective in recent days. host: here's a headline from the wall street journal -- why should americans care what is happening in mali? guest: this has become the most attractive place for jihadist around the world to gather especially since the french intervention occurred three weeks ago. foreign fighters coming into the region not only from across africa, but
. and iran and pakistan, other countries have acquired them and we live with them and we tend not to think about them too much. what would it take to get rid of them? the thesis he put out in this, it's guy -- goats doing take some disaster or mishaps before the world really wakes up and says we really need to do something about this. in his fantasy and it really is just a fantasy, it's a thought experiment, not a prediction. in 20 or 25 years, there someone in the pakistan in that ongoing conflict will trigger a nuclear bomb which will set off kind of quasi nuclear winter and do damage to the power gid. when you set off a nuclear bomb, you cause an electromagnetic pulse which can damage power grid. as you know, power grids are essential. significant damage to power grids that can cause a lot of casualties. in his scenario, some small, some minor mishaps occurs. after that people think, gee, this is really serious and we need to get rid of these weapons. at the end of his piece the world is a safer place. the problems of the world are tough. they're not always cheery to contemplate. host:
this morning. police in pakistan say five female teachers are dead after being ambushed. the women were working for a non-governmental organizations on the way to a community center. two health workers were killed. the attack happened in a province where many militants oppose female education. an update on secretary of state hillary clinton. doctors say she is making excellent progress at new york presbyterian hospital with a blood clot in her head. doctors say they are confident the blood thinners will dissolve blood clot and she will make a full recovery. new laws taking effect across the country today, and in maryland, same-sex couples were greeted with cheers and noisemakers as gay marriage became legal in the first state south of the mason-dixon line. those are some of the latest headlines on c-span radio. >> anxiety, dread, fear, what would happen january 1, 1863 when the emancipation proclamation was signed. many people spent three months those 100 days, begging the president, but do not do it, retract it. you still have time to step back. part of what i would like to do is tell you some
about the a rather good aid, but on pakistan, republicans and democrats a we need to payback that aid. rand paul has really been pushing that. others like senator john mccain say we cannot just cut them off. foreign aid is very important if you want to get them to do what we want them to do and foster democracy. guest: before we let you go, bob cusack, we'll take another phone call. tell us about the freshman class and who are some names, faces people should be looking out for, people might make a name for themselves. guest: senator tim kaine is a democrat from virginia. he defeated george allen in the election. he is a former governor. this is very close to president obama. he was almost vice-president. talk about your money in the senate. elizabeth warren won a huge battle with senator scott brown. how will she going to operate? the financial industry is a little bit nervous about her. she had the idea to come up with the consumer bureau that was so controversial, the agency that is now up and running as far as wall street reform. those two have strong personalities. they could also
: your parents immigrated to the u.s.? where are they from? guest: there from pakistan. at the end of the day, defining "american" is defining who we are as a society. it is up to congress to get together and fix the problem. host: "the immigration system is not working. it is broke into the corps, and there is a massive problem for the government." and other tweet says, "what about the rule that would have a -- it would have required employers to act when they got a no match letter from social security?" guest: the bush administration issued a rule that when employers got a letter from social security saying that the name and the number do not match or the number is fake or something, look into it, and here you are we are letting you know, the rule said they had to pursue a certain number of steps. if those various things do not resolve it, they had to let the guy go. what happened was that the unholy alliance of the aclu, the u.s. chamber of commerce, and the afl-cio sued that rule because they knew it when identify illegal immigrants in the work force. they succeeded in stopping
pakistan is probably saying they want grown attacks but publicly they have denounced them. these are acts of war under any definition. we cannot believe that, as a country, has unilateral status. it is called american exceptional lesson. what the rest of the world hears is hypocrisy when we say we have a right to use our drones whenever we think our national interests are at stake. i recently spoke to the parliamentarians of nato. these parliamentarians were very supportive of american drone policy and many of the nato countries are developing their own programs. i asked in english baroness, what will she say when china or iran vaporizes someone on the london bridge because they believe they are a threat to their country? what would you possibly say to object when the argument for drones that we now have the authority to take out anyone or anything in other countries that threaten us? it is anathema under international law. after world war two, we developed an international law that developed stability where countries have to take steps before they go to war. they cannot act unilaterally.
Search Results 0 to 9 of about 10